{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","uuid":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","normalized_title":"marxandtheconceptofhistoricaltime","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":200,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Marx%20and%20the%20Concept%20of%20Historical%20Time","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/search"},"page":{"printed_page":110,"pdf_page":114,"physical_index":114,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"20658578996ee90e7da90371adc2ce884f5320776eca68ff83e9509bbeb4c77c"},"chapter":"第三章劳工向何处去？","content":"抽象劳动是时间化的—一它一直是抽象劳动时间—一因为它是资本主义中“社会劳动”的含义。具体劳动有一个基本的社会维度:资本主义内部的“社会个人”是具体劳动作为一种独特的社会形式(也就是说，以私人和孤立的存在为特征)的承担者。然而，抽象劳动代表了商品生产社会的原始社会特征：“劳动的一般或抽象特征是……它的社会特征，因为它是包含在不同劳动产品中的劳动的平等特征。社会劳动的这种特定形式使商品生产区别于其他生产方式。53因此，任何资本主义特有的“社会时间”概念都必须从抽象劳动出发。正如托姆巴所阐述的那样，“抽象劳动的时间，把自己定位为调节交换关系的时间，构成了一种新的先验形式，制约了经验的先验结构。”54用福柯的实证主义术语来说，这是一种历史的先验，重写《知识考古学》中的一段话，这是一种持续的“行为的现实条件……一种先验的真理，而不是可能永远不会做的，或真正给予经验的真理;而是给定的历史的先验，因为它是实际发生的事情。55波斯顿对抽象劳动作为“一般社会中介”和“社会总中介”的持续强调是有根据的:抽象劳动不仅是整个具体劳动多样性的共同之处；“更确切地说，是(抽象)劳动的社会功能使它具有普遍性。”56它是价值的实体和尺度，因为它是一个纯粹社会化的时间，一个使所有个体的时间化为可交换的时间(用马克思的话来说，它使每一种形式的“复杂劳动”化为“简单平均劳动”成为可能)。正如居伊·德博(GuyDebord)所断言的那样，这个时间“除了它的可交换性之外就没有现实”57，但强调这一点很重要抽象劳动时间最初不是一个量，而是一种社会关系，一种“只能通过在其中表现出来的差异的影响来量化的调节力量”。58同样重要的是要强调，抽象劳动时间与时钟时间不是一回事。前者在本体论上依赖于后者一一它的同质性、可量化性和可分割性是以时钟为基础的一一但它并不等同于时钟。59时钟在历史上先于抽象劳动，并将在抽象劳动之后继续存在(这一点与海德格尔的立场相吻合，即时钟“在事实上是必要的”60，也就是说它不一定是“不真实的”)。但这并不是最重要的一点。抽象劳动控制着时钟一一最直接的是通过它的具体劳动的尺度一一然而，它自己的尺度不是时钟，而是货币(在资本主义中，时钟作为一种时间形式服从于货币:它记录的不是阳光的“自然”时间，而是价值增值的“自然”规律)。61货币，无论是作为商品还是作为资本—一作为“普遍劳动时间的物化”62，还是作为形式上独立的价值63——都构成了抽象劳动的真正尺度。\n\n53 Karl Marx, quoted in Massimiliano Tomba, Historical Temporalities of Capital: An Anti-Historicist Perspective’ , Historical Materialism 17 (2009), 48.\n\n54Tomba, Marx's Temporalities, 108.\n\ns what I mean by the term is an a priori that isa condition of reality for statementsan a priori not of truths that might never be said, or really given to experience; but the a priori of a history that is given, since it is that of things actually said.' Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language [1969], trans. A.M. Sheridan Smith (New York: Pantheon Books, 1972), 127. This a priori is the successor to the positive unconscious of knowledge’ in The Order of Things: a distinctly historical unconscious underlying scientific discourses. See Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: an Archaeology of the Human Sciences [1966] (New York and London: Routledge Classics, 2002), xi-xii.\n\n56 Postone, Time, Labor, and Social Domination, 151. As Altusser says of Sartre, so too can we say of Postone: he is the philosopher of mediations par excellence.' See Louis Althusser, Marxism is not a Historicism' , in Althusser and Balibar, Reading Capital, 136. Consider Postone' s culminating definition of value: Value is, then, a category of mediation: it is at once a historically determinate, self-distributing form of wealth and an objectified, self-mediating form of social relations.' Postone, Time, Labor and Social Domination, 154.\n\n57 Guy Debord, Society of the Spectacle [1967], trans. Ken Knabb (London: Rebel Press, 1992), 87. I owe this reference to Bonefeld, Abstract labour: Against its nature and on its time’ , 262.\n\n110","previous_page":109,"next_page":111}